中国组织工程研究
中國組織工程研究
중국조직공정연구
Journal of Clinical Rehabilitative Tissue Engineering Research
2015年
43期
6953-6957
,共5页
刘瑞端%肖荣驰%唐志宏%靳安民
劉瑞耑%肖榮馳%唐誌宏%靳安民
류서단%초영치%당지굉%근안민
生物材料%骨生物材料%聚醚醚酮%钛质%融合器%单节段%腰椎%椎间融合%疗效%生物相容性
生物材料%骨生物材料%聚醚醚酮%鈦質%融閤器%單節段%腰椎%椎間融閤%療效%生物相容性
생물재료%골생물재료%취미미동%태질%융합기%단절단%요추%추간융합%료효%생물상용성
背景：钛合金融合器因弹性模量较高，术后易出现相邻椎体下沉及应力遮挡延迟融合等缺点，近年来逐渐被聚醚醚酮融合器所取代。目的：对比钛合金融合器、聚醚醚酮融合器用于单节段腰椎后路减压椎间植骨融合内固定的疗效。方法：纳入104例单节段腰椎疾病患者，其中男57例，女47例，年龄(41.2±10.5)岁，由腰椎后路置入双侧钛合金椎弓根钉后行椎板减压，将椎板减压后的颗粒骨放入合适融合器内进行椎间植骨融合，其中54例置入钛合金融合器，50例置入聚醚醚酮融合器。治疗后随访24个月，评估两组腰部与下肢目测类比评分、JOA评分，CT检查椎间植骨融合及融合器下沉情况。结果与结论：随访12，24个月，两组腰部与下肢目测类比评分、JOA评分均较治疗前明显改善(P <0.05)，但两组间比较差异无显著性意义。随访12个月时，钛合金组融合率为94%，聚醚醚酮组为74%，组间比较差异有显著性意义(P=0.012)；随访24个月，钛合金组植骨融合率为100%，聚醚醚酮组为84%，组间比较差异有显著性意义(P=0.016)。随访24个月，钛合金组融合器下沉率为36%，聚醚醚酮组为30%，两组间比较差异无显著性意义。结果并未证实聚醚醚酮融合器的临床效果优于钛合金融合器。
揹景：鈦閤金融閤器因彈性模量較高，術後易齣現相鄰椎體下沉及應力遮擋延遲融閤等缺點，近年來逐漸被聚醚醚酮融閤器所取代。目的：對比鈦閤金融閤器、聚醚醚酮融閤器用于單節段腰椎後路減壓椎間植骨融閤內固定的療效。方法：納入104例單節段腰椎疾病患者，其中男57例，女47例，年齡(41.2±10.5)歲，由腰椎後路置入雙側鈦閤金椎弓根釘後行椎闆減壓，將椎闆減壓後的顆粒骨放入閤適融閤器內進行椎間植骨融閤，其中54例置入鈦閤金融閤器，50例置入聚醚醚酮融閤器。治療後隨訪24箇月，評估兩組腰部與下肢目測類比評分、JOA評分，CT檢查椎間植骨融閤及融閤器下沉情況。結果與結論：隨訪12，24箇月，兩組腰部與下肢目測類比評分、JOA評分均較治療前明顯改善(P <0.05)，但兩組間比較差異無顯著性意義。隨訪12箇月時，鈦閤金組融閤率為94%，聚醚醚酮組為74%，組間比較差異有顯著性意義(P=0.012)；隨訪24箇月，鈦閤金組植骨融閤率為100%，聚醚醚酮組為84%，組間比較差異有顯著性意義(P=0.016)。隨訪24箇月，鈦閤金組融閤器下沉率為36%，聚醚醚酮組為30%，兩組間比較差異無顯著性意義。結果併未證實聚醚醚酮融閤器的臨床效果優于鈦閤金融閤器。
배경：태합금융합기인탄성모량교고，술후역출현상린추체하침급응력차당연지융합등결점，근년래축점피취미미동융합기소취대。목적：대비태합금융합기、취미미동융합기용우단절단요추후로감압추간식골융합내고정적료효。방법：납입104례단절단요추질병환자，기중남57례，녀47례，년령(41.2±10.5)세，유요추후로치입쌍측태합금추궁근정후행추판감압，장추판감압후적과립골방입합괄융합기내진행추간식골융합，기중54례치입태합금융합기，50례치입취미미동융합기。치료후수방24개월，평고량조요부여하지목측류비평분、JOA평분，CT검사추간식골융합급융합기하침정황。결과여결론：수방12，24개월，량조요부여하지목측류비평분、JOA평분균교치료전명현개선(P <0.05)，단량조간비교차이무현저성의의。수방12개월시，태합금조융합솔위94%，취미미동조위74%，조간비교차이유현저성의의(P=0.012)；수방24개월，태합금조식골융합솔위100%，취미미동조위84%，조간비교차이유현저성의의(P=0.016)。수방24개월，태합금조융합기하침솔위36%，취미미동조위30%，량조간비교차이무현저성의의。결과병미증실취미미동융합기적림상효과우우태합금융합기。
BACKGROUND:Due to the higher modulus of elasticity, titanium cages are prone to have the folowing shortcomings: adjacent vertebral sinking and delayed fusion resulting from stress shielding; therefore, in recent years, it has been gradualy replaced by polyetheretherketone cages. OBJECTIVE:To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients undergoing posterior lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screw fixation in which either a polyetheretherketone cage or a titanium cage was implanted. METHODS: The pre- and postoperative data of 104 patients who underwent single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion were colected and analyzed, including 57 males and 47 females, aged (41.2±10.5) years. The 58 of 104 patients received the titanium cage and the remaining 52 patients received the polyetheretherketone cage. Visual analog scale scores and Japanese Orthopaedic Association Scores of the lumbar and lower limbs were recorded at 24 hours of postoperative folow-up; CT scan was used to detect bone fusion and cage subsidence. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:After 12 and 24 months of folow-up, the visual analog scale scores and Japanese Orthopaedic Association Scores of the lumbar and lower limbs were al improved in the two groups compared with the previous (P < 0.05), but there was no difference between the two groups. At 12 and 24 months of folow-up, the fusion rates were 94% and 100% in the titanium cage group as wel as 74% and 84% in the polyetheretherketone cage group, respectively, and a significant difference was found between the two groups (P=0.012 andP=0.016). At 24 months of folow-up, the subsidence rate was 36% in the titanium cage group and 30% in the polyetheretherketone cage group, and there was no difference between the two groups. These findings indicate that the superiority of polyetheretherketone cages over titanium cages has not been demonstrated.
